Resource Mobilization and Political Process Models

Neil Lund

2024-09-12

Recap

Older models emphasizing strain, societal breakdown, grievance give way to newer models that emphasize:

  • The role of organization, structure, and resources in explaining contentious behavior

  • The social and political context for collective action, over studying “crowds” on their own

  • Continuity between conventional state-approved political behavior and non-conventional forms.

  • The importance of rationality over pathologies (even for extreme behaviors like genocide)

Two closely related perspectives termed Resource Mobilization Theory and the Political Process Model exemplify this shift.

Models of contention

Resource Mobilization Theory

Why do we see a surge in civil rights activism in the 1960s?

Resource Mobilization Theory: Civil Rights

Why do we see a surge in civil rights activism in the 1960s?

  • The specific grievances aren’t new
  • Conditions are (arguably) improving.
  • Many participants aren’t directly impacted by the grievance anyway

Resource Mobilization Theory: Civil Rights

“…there is always enough discontent in any society to supply the grass-roots support for a movement” - Turner and Killian (1972)

If we take grievances as a given, what else impedes groups from forming protest movements? You can’t explain variation by pointing to something that is static!

Resource Mobilization Theory: The Free Rider Problem

Civil rights are a collective benefit, but the costs of protests are borne by individuals.

\[ U = PB - C \]

\(U\) is the expected benefit of protesting

\(PB\) is the (B)enefit times the (P)robability that the benefit depends on your participation

\(C\) is the cost or risk associated with protesting.

If you can enjoy this benefit without paying the costs, then not participating is always preferable to participating. So collective benefits probably can’t explain why anyone participates, even for really severe grievances!

Resource Mobilization Theory: Solving Free Rider Problems

  • What are some reasons someone might support a pressure campaign other than directly benefiting from the campaign’s success?
  • What are some reasons that an organization, politician, or donor might help support a pressure campaign?

Resource Mobilization Theory: Organizations

Groups need:

  • A pool of resources (donations, external political pressure, information) that can offset the costs of action.

    • These can be non-material (solidary benefits) or they can be more concrete

  • Social Movement Organizations (SMOs) that can channel resources toward effective actions

Resource Mobilization Theory: the NRA

The NRA is an SMO in the gun-rights movement. How do they offset the costs of participation?

Selective material incentives can help offset the costs of support

Resource Mobilization Theory: The Militia Movement

The Michigian Liberty Militia is also an SMO in the (broadly defined) gun rights movement. How do they offset the costs of collective action?

Non-material “solidary” benefits might include camaraderie or thrilling experiences or the warm fuzzy feeling of making a difference.

Resource Mobilization Theory: Civil Rights Activism

  • What kinds of protest resources are increasing in the late 1960s and early 1970s? For rank-and-file supporters? For other organizations? For politicians and party leaders?

Resource Mobilization Theory: Elite Support for traditional organizations

Marger, Martin N. “Social movement organizations and response to environmental change: The NAACP, 1960-1973.” Social Problems 32.1 (1984): 16-30.

Marger, Martin N. “Social movement organizations and response to environmental change: The NAACP, 1960-1973.” Social Problems 32.1 (1984): 16-30.

Resource Mobilization Theory: Explaining diverse tactics

  • Fewer resources = more solidary benefits, but also a very different kind of supporter. Requires dedication and “strong ties”

  • Some marketplaces are saturated: you can’t compete directly with the NRA, so you might need to offer a different reward entirely.

Resource Mobilization Theory: Strategic dilemmas

  • What are the costs/benefits associated with gaining the support of conscience constituents, elite donors, or isolated members?

  • What are the costs/benefits associated with gaining the support of highly motivated activists for riskier activism?

  • Can seeking resources sometimes cause movements to undermine or alter their goals? How do contemporary movements like BLM attempt to address these costs/benefits?

The Political Process Model

  • Closely related to resource mobilization theory, but difference emphasis

  • Emphasizes the role of the political system itself in explaining the emergence of protest, particularly the political opportunity structure

  • Central concerns/Concepts

    • The contentious repertoire

    • The political opportunity structure

    • Mobilizing structures

    • Cycles and waves

    • Framing processes

The Contentious Repertoire

…collective action involves not only what people know how to do, but also what those on the receiving end would expect and understand - Eitan Y. Alimi

  • Activists have a menu of options for creating pressure. Extreme actions (terrorism and revolution) sit along a continuum with more “normal” forms like voting or lobbying.

  • The repertoire is dependent on conditions, and items leave and enter over time, or they take on new meanings, or shift from being seen as radical to being viewed as routine

Tarring and Feathering is no longer part of the contemporary repertoire even though it might still be technically feasible.

The Contentious Repertoire

British Repertoire prior to 19th century

  • Grain seizures/riots

  • Rough music

  • Forced illumination

British Repertoire my the mid 19th century

  • Protests and social movements

  • Boycotts

  • Party formation

The Contentious Repertoire

Political Opportunity Structures

“consistent – but not necessarily formal or permanent – dimensions of the political struggle that encourage people to engage in contentious politics” - Sidney Tarrow

Examples:

  • Accessible institutions

  • Elite support or opposition

  • State ability/will to use repression

  • State capacity to implement new policies

  • Shared beliefs or “cognitive liberation” that can politicize grievances

Opportunity structures and repertoires interact to shape contention.

Political Opportunity Structures: Eisenger (1971)

Question: Since protest is just one tool in the toolbox, what factors might drive actors to use it?

  • What are the alternatives?

  • Why choose it over other options?

  • How/when might protest work?

Political Opportunity Structures: Why protest?

  • Model 1: Protest is an expression of frustration with a closed system

  • Model 2: Protest occurs when structures are somewhat open, but still too closed for “insider” tactics to be available.

What are some empirical implications of one model vs the other?

Political Opportunity Structures: data

  • Outcome: level of black protest activity in 43 US cities in 1968

  • Measures:

    • DV: protest activity (collected from newspaper data)

    • IV: openness of the opportunity structure as measured by:

      • Mayoral + (as opposed to city manager)

      • Ward system + (as opposed to at-large)

      • Partisan Elections + (as opposed to non-partisan)

Political Opportunity Structures: findings